exactly I am sure we could all find gains like Banmate over the last 4 years where we compounded 7-8% a year. This guy is bragging about being mediocre.
I just realize I can so easily manipulate my returns by making it up that I don't see why I would post my returns to show you.
I think its easier to tell my gains because I have said on this message board time and time again when I bought and sold certain securities.
Also I talk a lot on what stocks are worth what. So I think that is a better way of showing I am a good investor than posting a record of all my transaction since 2008.
Since sept 20, 2011 when I started my investment partnership I am compounding at 40.8% a year vs the market's 21.4%. My goal is to double the market so I have failed somewhat.
In total I am up 80.2% vs.s the markets 39.7%
I am not showing the transactions. As a company I privately protect this kind of information.
Yes I would agree the stock has downside risk relating to MHPS that isn't currently being priced in. Its assuming MHPS is stabilized in Q3.
Though Terex's value as I mentioned before has a huge range of values and its hard to really pinpoint its value given MHPS. If MHPS stabilizes $30-36 is approproate if it deteriorates something like $20-$25 is appropriate. If MHPS starts to actually deliver than $50 is appropriate.
So I still like the terex company I just didn't like the downside risk. Before I was valuing it at $50 and saw no downside risk with the stock at $30. When I talk about downside risk I am saying valuation wise (I don't care what the market does). Now with the downside risk of $20 that is realistic it isn't as fun betting on a double edged sword that can go from $34 to $20 or $34 to $50
I would rather park my money in stocks with only upside risk. I like stocks that I buy at $50 that I think is worth $100. And if I get everything wrong its worth $70 or something. It is called Margin of Safety. Terex no longer has the appropriate margin of safety therefore I can't risk holding it.
Lol explain terex's businesses banmate? You're th one telling people terex was a gamble and a hunch . sounds kind of dumb to me .
Explain terex show you have some skill besides buying Dow 30 companies and making below market beating returns.
We know you're a joke because you talk about your money gains not % gains . % gains only matter the more money you have isn't an indicator of you being good
you guys give analysts too much credit. They just go a long with momentum of the stock. Stock is underperforming they downgrade. if its overperforming they upgrade. Its pretty simple for them.
Analysts don't invest we do. So as dumb as some people are here on the message board their opinion means more to me than analysts.
And their opinions mean nothing to me. But analysts opinions mean less than nothing. If anything i would bet the opposite of them but not of u
hmm I am not sure what the real estate is worth. Some bad accounting rules don't allow fair values on obvious assets. Anyways we do know from their balance sheet they only have $300M in land and land is the only thing in real estate which appreciates in value the physical building shouldn't. So maybe the land is worth 4 times as much or $1.2B so the company has tangible book value of $3.2 B and it trades at $2.6B. But ya that price is made up with my fake real estate number.
Furthermore I think it will take them 2 full years to revers Johnson's masterpiece. I see them losing $600M the next 2 years and that was before they are issuing all this debt so maybe more. And if you remember before Johnson they were earning around $2 a share. I felt it could go up more but at this point $2 seems like a realistic cap. So why own a stock at $11 that may earn $2 in 4-5 years . And that's if they turn it around. There is significant risk that they don't. So it seems to trade at an overvalued price. I was thinking at $8 is fair value.
Though if you have some insight on the real estate values that would change my analysis. I am good at reading and making insights but I can't randomly guess real estate prices. And the annual report does not provide me with enough information to make intelligent guesses regarding that . Which is why the accounting rules stink for land values. Its affecting my investment decisions.
you should see 3 different things
1) No CEO was ever as bad as Ron Johnson
2) 2007-2008 you had a huge recession.
3) excluding goodwill writedowns Macy wasn't losing money.
What you have to worry is unlike Macy's there is a real chance JCP goes into bankruptcy. Its a risk you can't discount and at $11 the price isn't reflecting a company that has a high chance of going bankrupt. It reflects a company that will earn $3 a share in 2-3 years. Which to me is a unrealistic
Also a lot of the Macy's bankruptcy talk is kind of unfair. Every company was going bankrupt in 2007-2008. Even Wells Fargo and GE there was talk of bankruptcy. SO its unfair to compare an 08 company to today.
If this JCP existed in 2008 it would already be bankrupt
lol another one of your oil BOE'd plays. See if you paid attention to my formula on the last one we wouldnt be in this mess!
lol k I looked at their presentation briefly. I don't have time now to do analysis right now but I should have one in a couple of days. It should be easy to value. They seem to have given all the numbers i need
"So I've had a lot of conversation today with people about this 2015 goals. Lot of pushback of those goals seems unreasonable. And frankly, without some help from the market, they probably are reasonable. But I don't think we are given up on these targets today. I think that 2015 market will be better than today, but I also I think as I said earlier, there is a lot that we can do internally to improve our earnings performance pretty demonstrably without a lot of help from the market."
DeFeo is a really good CEO and I enjoy how candid he is in his presentations. It really helps investors. Though he does leak out good news and bad news early.
Also the comment on market help is a pretty scary one since its vague and ambiguous. To me its saying we will earn $3.33 in 2015. .
okay ya you're right. I get it now he has 2 quotes on the 2/3. One is clear one isn't.
MHPS though still he didn't say profitability. I think $4 2015 is realistic for sure. But at $34 its not such a great bargain.
seems my downgrade yesterday pummeled JCP today.
lol today may be the first day people model bankruptcy risk for JCP. $10 is overpriced if you consider their meager earnings and way overpriced when you consider they have a 20-30% chance of going bankrupt. Though I think they can turn around the Johnson mess that is hardly a sure thing
The only thing I would change is
"Deere is in a great place to continue to grow internationally and in the U.S.. The world will need more and more food in coming years and Deere has a great product"
The U.S. is still the best market in the world
lol ya its dubious if this banmate guy even beats the market. He posted his 6 best investments. He seemed to like to talk about more about how much money he made as opposed to what %. So if he has $500K and he makes 10K he is happy even though that is only 2%. He kept saying he earns more than big guys.
He says a lot of stuff that indicates his overall results are far from special.
Anyways I agree Terex isn't a bad buy. I have said for a while its at fair value. But I see the range being big. I can see it dropping big or gaining big. Though I am more comfortable longing different investments at the moment
lol in no way can this be good news chumpy. Its weird they said they issued equity to payback debt. Equity has a higher discount rate than debt so no matter what the equity loses value.
It says they have weak cash flows if they need to raise equity to buyback debt. It would have been more re-assuring had they just said we are issuing stock for general corporate purposes.
paying down debt is great but its quite dumb to issue to equity to payback debt. It is pretty unprecedented since there is a 100% loss.
I think mntx has trouble turning their working capital into cash.